Comments on: E-books and censorship: Will the bad guys even be able to zap files from global digital libraries someday? http://www.teleread.org/blog/2008/05/05/e-books-and-censorship-will-the-bad-guys-be-able-to-zap-files-from-global-digital-libraries-someday/ News & views on e-books, libraries, publishing and related topics Sun, 06 Jul 2008 00:55:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Brian Carnell http://www.teleread.org/blog/2008/05/05/e-books-and-censorship-will-the-bad-guys-be-able-to-zap-files-from-global-digital-libraries-someday/#comment-787245 Brian Carnell Mon, 05 May 2008 19:40:38 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/blog/2008/05/05/e-books-and-censorship-will-the-bad-guys-be-able-to-zap-files-from-global-digital-libraries-someday/#comment-787245 In its 2007 country profile of the U.S., Freedom House mentions two specific things that seem to keep us lower than the other countries you mentioned: 1. Continued FCC regulation of broadcast networks -- its odd here that Freedom House on the one hand rightly suggests that FCC censorship is still a problem, but on the other hand also apparently doesn't think the FCC does enough in preventing concentrated ownership of media properties. Anyway, given the rise of cable here, the effectiveness of FCC censorship is starting to tilt toward zero, but that it exists at all is seriously problematic. 2. Freedom House really doesn't like our tendency to require reporters to divulge information in criminal cases that they dug up as part of their reporting. This is a touchy subject. On the one hand, the jailing of reporters over the Valerie Plame affair was outrageous. On the other hand, they cited the controversy over the SF Chronicle's publishing of grand jury testimony relating to the Balco steroids investigation. Leaking grand jury testimony is a crime for a good reason, and I don't have any sympathy for reporters who republish grand jury testimony. They are being used by one side or the other, and typically by agents of the state itself. In its 2007 country profile of the U.S., Freedom House mentions two specific things that seem to keep us lower than the other countries you mentioned:

1. Continued FCC regulation of broadcast networks — its odd here that Freedom House on the one hand rightly suggests that FCC censorship is still a problem, but on the other hand also apparently doesn’t think the FCC does enough in preventing concentrated ownership of media properties. Anyway, given the rise of cable here, the effectiveness of FCC censorship is starting to tilt toward zero, but that it exists at all is seriously problematic.

2. Freedom House really doesn’t like our tendency to require reporters to divulge information in criminal cases that they dug up as part of their reporting. This is a touchy subject. On the one hand, the jailing of reporters over the Valerie Plame affair was outrageous. On the other hand, they cited the controversy over the SF Chronicle’s publishing of grand jury testimony relating to the Balco steroids investigation. Leaking grand jury testimony is a crime for a good reason, and I don’t have any sympathy for reporters who republish grand jury testimony. They are being used by one side or the other, and typically by agents of the state itself.

]]>